Gays, blacks and the church

[The Folk Prophet]

5 minutes ago, Grunt said:

By "some people" I assume he meant Prophets of God

I think he meant @Just_A_Guy.

[Grunt]

Just now, The Folk Prophet said:

I think he meant @Just_A_Guy.

I'd never question JAG. 😉

Edited February 5, 2022 by Grunt

[Traveler]

On 2/4/2022 at 7:59 AM, JohnsonJones said:

Beyond 3 Generations?

Imperial Rome.

Ancient Greece and Macedonia.

Sparta for example.

Ancient Egypt.

I am not saying it is RIGHT or MORAL, but these civilizations had strong LGBTQ (well, LGB elements at least) elements to them and lasted for quite a while.  3 Generations is a rather easy quota to fill.  If you asked for longer than that it would decrease how easy it is to fill that range.  A generation is normally 20 years (and they lived shorter lives in those days of history in general, or at least we assume they did), so you are asking for civilizations that had these elements that lasted longer than 60 years.  There are several to choose from.

I am not sure I agree - I would like to see the sampling of the data you have.  As I stated there may be small samples - especially among the wealthy ruling class (which was less than 1% of the population).  I would be willing to consider even around 10%.  I do not think that any of the societies you have suggested had over 10% of their population abandoning what we now call traditional families.  

 

The Traveler

[JohnsonJones]

10 hours ago, Traveler said:

I am not sure I agree - I would like to see the sampling of the data you have.  As I stated there may be small samples - especially among the wealthy ruling class (which was less than 1% of the population).  I would be willing to consider even around 10%.  I do not think that any of the societies you have suggested had over 10% of their population abandoning what we now call traditional families.  

 

The Traveler

They didn't abandon traditional families, if that is what you are asking about.

They had a LARGE LGBT (or LGB) influence on their culture and society.  This is what I understood you were asking.

HOWEVER, as was pointed out above, those were two DIFFERENT parts of their lives.  They would have scoffed at the idea of Gay Marriage that we have being pushed in our society today. 

Marriage and family were one thing, men with men or women with women (or worse in some instances) were completely different things than what Marriage and Family were. 

If you are looking for a large abandonment of the Traditional family as your standing point, that becomes a lot harder to find.  LGB influence was a major factor in some civilizations, but it should NOT be confused with Marriage and Family or the abandonment of it.  Other immoralities interfered with it (and was one of the major pushes of Augustus in the Roman empire.  As excesses reduced the focus on the family, he created reforms and laws to refocus society on Marriage and family life), but LGB was not necessarily seen to be congruent with Marriage and Family like many see it today.

In fact, the entire idea of LGBTQ being the same idea or same focus as Marriage and Family life is a relatively new thing in our modern society.  It was not something seen anciently or in past civilizations, so there's nothing that I know of to really compare the modern idea we have being pushed today (Gay marriage is the equivalent of Traditional marriage and families) in the past.

[Traveler]

On 2/2/2022 at 7:09 PM, LDSGator said:

Yes, correct. It's very new. And the awkward truth is that the right failed in some way to conserve their values and pass them on to their children. Speaking in generalities, not an insult to every conservative out there. 
 

And, because a generation is growing up with gay marriage being accepted, it’s highly, highly unlikely things will swing back to the time it wasn’t. 
 

Like you mentioned, time will tell. 

I do not know of nor is there any indication - EVER - that a gay person has been conceived (let alone borne) from the sexual activities of a gay only couple.  99.9% of all known species that have ever existed on this planet are now extinct.   The scientific term to explain this is "survival of the fittest".  The short scientific explanation of all species that have become extinct is that they eventually failed to reproduce.   It should not take a scientist to realize that the trend you recognize in generations growing up more accepting of reproductive behavior that does not, nor ever will, reproduce; cannot continue indefinitely if the human species is to survive and not join the ranks of the many extinct species that are not "fit" to survive. 

My point is that if "things" do not swing back over time (scientifically speaking) the likely hood that the human species will eventually join the many extinct species, increases.  Perhaps the question we should all ask ourselves is -- Will you be a part of the solution or part of the problem?

 

The Traveler

[Traveler]

On 2/9/2022 at 4:10 AM, JohnsonJones said:

......

In fact, the entire idea of LGBTQ being the same idea or same focus as Marriage and Family life is a relatively new thing in our modern society.  It was not something seen anciently or in past civilizations, so there's nothing that I know of to really compare the modern idea we have being pushed today (Gay marriage is the equivalent of Traditional marriage and families) in the past.

The fact that certain things do not seem to exist in any civilization for any credible period of time does not mean that such was never tried.  I would suggest that in every instance it was tried, regardless of how technically advanced the civilization was, it did not last even long enough to make any recognizable  impact in history.  I have never understood why someone (society) would abandon principles that have proven to work in favor of "theories" or other "ideas" with no indication of favorable or sustainable results. 

One of the theories to explain that no other (than ours on earth) advanced civilization has ever been discovered in our universe is; that as intelligent species become technically more advanced that they become more likely to be the product of their own demise.   I am thinking you may be on to something.

 

The Traveler